Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: floo on January 16, 2016, 12:18:31 PM
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/12102278/Easter-date-to-be-fixed-within-next-five-to-10-years.html
I think it is daft that the date of Easter hasn't been fixed before now. Christmas is a fixed date even though it is highly unlikely Jesus was born on that date.
Some schools are already fixing their Spring terms dates without taking Easter into consideration, which seems sensible.
-
I don't see what the problem with a movable date is, seeing as to can work out the dates for Easter for the next million years if you wanted to. Keep it movable.
-
I don't see what the problem with a movable date is, seeing as to can work out the dates for Easter for the next million years if you wanted to. Keep it movable.
Why?
-
Why?
Becasue Ad_O says that it is the way HIS god wants it! And, of course, everyone else, religious and atheists must do what they are told by god's messenger the Holy Ad_O!
-
Why?
Because Easter is a movable feast, linked to the Hebrew lunar calendar. Break the link and it's not Easter anymore, just spring break, man, yeah!
-
I don't see what the problem with a movable date is, seeing as to can work out the dates for Easter for the next million years if you wanted to. Keep it movable.
In the UK, the problem is that it is a holiday which means that the school term between Christmas and Easter can be either very short, very long or somewhere in between.
Personally, I don't really care if it's fixed or not. It's moved around for my entire life without causing me any serious problems.
-
Bearing in mind that I haven't got that many years to bother about what date it is :) I think it will be a bit boring not to have to think about which days the shops will be closed etc!!!
-
A fixed date would be useful for those planning holidays, which involves schools too, and since the date is variable now then no date is 'special', so I can't see that fixing it should be a problem.
-
A fixed date would be useful for those planning holidays, which involves schools too, and since the date is variable now then no date is 'special', so I can't see that fixing it should be a problem.
Eh? Problem planning? Bollocks! As I said, you can work out the date for Easter for the next million years and more (barring any cosmic disaster).
-
Even so, if it were say the second full week in every April, plus a PH on the following Monday, why would that be a problem - it might be more convenient since school terms wouldn't vary just because of lunar phases.
-
Because Easter is a movable feast, linked to the Hebrew lunar calendar. Break the link and it's not Easter anymore, just spring break, man, yeah!
As I said before, Christmas is a fixed date, and it is highly unlikely Jesus was born on that day, so why does it matter if Easter is celebrated on a fixed date too, as no one knows for sure on which day he was supposedly crucified?
-
Still its nice to know that on some issues they fan consider going against tradition and precedent;-)
-
As I said before, Christmas is a fixed date, and it is highly unlikely Jesus was born on that day, so why does it matter if Easter is celebrated on a fixed date too, as no one knows for sure on which day he was supposedly crucified?
I firmly belive Christ was born on or around the date we crlebrate the feast. Easter is linked to the Jewish Passover. This is not an accidental link. Easter loses much of its significance if it is no longer linked to the Passover.
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/12102278/Easter-date-to-be-fixed-within-next-five-to-10-years.html
I think it is daft that the date of Easter hasn't been fixed before now. Christmas is a fixed date even though it is highly unlikely Jesus was born on that date.
Some schools are already fixing their Spring terms dates without taking Easter into consideration, which seems sensible.
This headline is probably a copy of one 20-odd years ago. It's been under discussion for years. Furthermore, schools have been setting their term dates without taking Easter into account since at least when I first started teaching.
Regarding the fixing of Christmas, that was easy because it was never tied to a given pre-existing event, such as Passover is.
-
Becasue Ad_O says that it is the way HIS god wants it! And, of course, everyone else, religious and atheists must do what they are told by god's messenger the Holy Ad_O!
Good to see your sarcasm, Matt. Sad to see how transparent and pathetic it is.
-
A fixed date would be useful for those planning holidays, which involves schools too, and since the date is variable now then no date is 'special', so I can't see that fixing it should be a problem.
But as I pointed out before, some schools and Local Authorities have been ignoring it in their planning for as long as I can remember.
-
Good to see your sarcasm, Matt. Sad to see how transparent and pathetic it is.
Not quite as pathetic as Ad_O's insistance that everything be set for everybody, regardless of religious belief, by his religious beliefs.
-
As I said before, Christmas is a fixed date, and it is highly unlikely Jesus was born on that day, so why does it matter if Easter is celebrated on a fixed date too, as no one knows for sure on which day he was supposedly crucified?
Floo this is probably the least correct statement you've ever made. Historians know that Christ was crucified immediately before Passover. Which year, and therefore exactly which date that was, is actually irrelevant. The event is tied to the date of Passover, which is a moveable feast. This is also where Matt's sarcastic comment is shown to be so daft - Easter isn't tied to a 'Christian' event, but to a Jewish one.
-
Not quite as pathetic as Ad_O's insistance that everything be set for everybody, regardless of religious belief, by his religious beliefs.
Don't like it? Move out of Europe. Europe is Christian.
-
Not quite as pathetic as Ad_O's insistance that everything be set for everybody, regardless of religious belief, by his religious beliefs.
Sorry, it's far more pathetic than ad-o's comment, since ad-o points out that the Christian event is closely tied to a Jewish event.
-
Don't like it? Move out of Europe. Europe is Christian.
Has Europe ever been 'Christian', ad-0? Can a geo-political entity have a religion?
-
Don't like it? Move out of Europe. Europe is Christian.
You can't have been almost anywhere in Europe in a long, long time.
-
Floo this is probably the least correct statement you've ever made. Historians know that Christ was crucified immediately before Passover. Which year, and therefore exactly which date that was, is actually irrelevant. The event is tied to the date of Passover, which is a moveable feast. This is also where Matt's sarcastic comment is shown to be so daft - Easter isn't tied to a 'Christian' event, but to a Jewish one.
Really Hope!
It was Ad_O who said it had to remain moveable because it was fixed at Passover - read what I said - I said his religious beliefs not that the belief was Christian!
-
Sorry, it's far more pathetic than ad-o's comment, since ad-o points out that the Christian event is closely tied to a Jewish event.
Hope, if I said that 2/6 was half-a-crown you would disagree purely because it was me that said it!
You are just so obvious! But then acting as someone else's back-up in attacking me at every opportunity is also bloody obvious.
-
I firmly belive Christ was born on or around the date we crlebrate the feast. Easter is linked to the Jewish Passover. This is not an accidental link. Easter loses much of its significance if it is no longer linked to the Passover.
Yep
Reminds me of Daniel 7:25
-
Hope, if I said that 2/6 was half-a-crown you would disagree purely because it was me that said it!
I disagreed with you simply because you were making an incorrect statement.
You are just so obvious! But then acting as someone else's back-up in attacking me at every opportunity is also bloody obvious.
If I'm that obvious, why do you make the erroneous comments that mean I have to be so obvious?
-
Floo this is probably the least correct statement you've ever made. Historians know that Christ was crucified immediately before Passover. Which year, and therefore exactly which date that was, is actually irrelevant. The event is tied to the date of Passover, which is a moveable feast. This is also where Matt's sarcastic comment is shown to be so daft - Easter isn't tied to a 'Christian' event, but to a Jewish one.
It is NOT a historical FACT that Jesus was crucified, just a belief, which may, or may not, have happened. However, as the date of Easter can vary so much surely it is far better to fix it. Those who want to celebrate it as a religious event can still do so on the day it is fixed.
-
Really Hope!
It was Ad_O who said it had to remain moveable because it was fixed at Passover - read what I said - I said his religious beliefs not that the belief was Christian!
And I pointed out that this wasn't a matter of what ad-o believes but one of historical, astronomical fact.
-
It is NOT a historical FACT that Jesus was crucified, just a belief, which may, or may not, have happened. However, as the date of Easter can vary so much surely it is far better to fix it. Those who want to celebrate it as a religious event can still do so on the day it is fixed.
Sorry to disappoint you, Floo, the area of belief is the resurrection. The crucifixion is not.
-
Sorry to disappoint you, Floo, the area of belief is the resurrection. The crucifixion is not.
Which is highly unlikely to have actually happened, as it simply isn't credible!
-
Historians know that Christ was crucified immediately before Passover. Which year, and therefore exactly which date that was, is actually irrelevant. The event is tied to the date of Passover, which is a moveable feast.
Well historians know the gospels say that although even they do not agree on which day Jesus was crucified.
This is also where Matt's sarcastic comment is shown to be so daft - Easter isn't tied to a 'Christian' event, but to a Jewish one.
Wrong again Hope.
Yes, it was originally, but with typical arrogance, Christians at the First Council of Nicea decided that the Jews don't know when Passover is and Christians don't all agree when it is even now.
-
Well historians know the gospels say that although even they do not agree on which day Jesus was crucified.
Historians do know which day he was crucified - just that some forget that Jews treat the timing of the start and finish of a day differently to you and I.
Yes, it was originally, but with typical arrogance, Christians at the First Council of Nicea decided that the Jews don't know when Passover is and Christians don't all agree when it is even now.
If that is the case, why is Easter still tied to the date of Passover. Regarding the difference in the dates of some celebrations, you need to remember that some people live on a different calendar (even calendars) to us here in the West.
-
Which is highly unlikely to have actually happened, as it simply isn't credible!
I suppose it depends on what one regards as 'credible'. 2350 or so years ago, the idea that an army could not only travel from Greece to the borders of what we now call India but win a series of victories on the way would have been regarded as non-credible; 2000 or so years ago, moving an army from Carthage to Italy via the Alps was regarded as non-credible. Both occurred. So what you regard as non-credible doesn't mean that something actually isn't credible.
-
I suppose it depends on what one regards as 'credible'. 2350 or so years ago, the idea that an army could not only travel from Greece to the borders of what we now call India but win a series of victories on the way would have been regarded as non-credible; 2000 or so years ago, moving an army from Carthage to Rome via the Alps was regarded as non-credible. Both occurred. So what you regard as non-credible doesn't mean that something actually isn't credible.
Both examples are explicable entirely and squarely within a naturalistic framework of matter-energy. Your guy-in-the-sky isn't. And we know that you can't provide an equivalent methodology for evaluating your set of claims, because everybody's had a go at asking for that and got the Beethoven's ear and Nelson's eye treatment.
-
I suppose it depends on what one regards as 'credible'. 2350 or so years ago, the idea that an army could not only travel from Greece to the borders of what we now call India but win a series of victories on the way would have been regarded as non-credible; 2000 or so years ago, moving an army from Carthage to Italy via the Alps was regarded as non-credible. Both occurred. So what you regard as non-credible doesn't mean that something actually isn't credible.
Just checking but you do know the difference between "non-credible" and "unlikely" don't you?
-
Just checking but you do know the difference between "non-credible" and "unlikely" don't you?
He certainly doesn't know the difference between "extraordinary humans making extraordinarily strenuous efforts to achieve a specific goal" and "magic," that's for sure.
-
Even so, if it were say the second full week in every April, plus a PH on the following Monday, why would that be a problem - it might be more convenient since school terms wouldn't vary just because of lunar phases.
Why not fix the school holidays and keep the Easter weekend variable, with a bank holiday?
-
Sorry to disappoint you, Floo, the area of belief is the resurrection. The crucifixion is not.
Yes it is - we have precious little evidence to support the crucifixion too. Sure it is much more inherently believable, but we are still relying on partial (rather than impartial) accounts written decades after the event.
I am happy to believe that the crucifixion occurred but there isn't anything like definitive evidence.
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/12102278/Easter-date-to-be-fixed-within-next-five-to-10-years.html
I think it is daft that the date of Easter hasn't been fixed before now. Christmas is a fixed date even though it is highly unlikely Jesus was born on that date.
Some schools are already fixing their Spring terms dates without taking Easter into consideration, which seems sensible.
Good idea.
The movable nature of Easter is a nightmare for schools and universities that need to sort terms. This year our current semester has two days missing from it (a Friday and a Monday) because Easter is early and you cannot fit a 12 week semester between early January and Easter.
AOs point about knowing well in advance isn't actually the point - it doesn't matter how far in advance you know it is still a pain, and you still can't fit in a 12 week semester between early January and Easter when is falls early as is the case this year.
-
Yes it is - we have precious little evidence to support the crucifixion too. Sure it is much more inherently believable, but we are still relying on partial (rather than impartial) accounts written decades after the event.
I am happy to believe that the crucifixion occurred but there isn't anything like definitive evidence.
Indeed. There's a great deal of good evidence that crucifixion has been practised - one more crucifixion added to the list is nothing. There has never once, anywhere, ever, been a single reliable, demonstrated case of an actually dead person (as opposed to a person suffering from any one of a number of death-mimicking states - there are lots of those) coming back to life. So we proportion our stance about the world to the available evidence, if we are wise and cautious and wish to avoid making preposterous claims.
-
Why not fix the school holidays and keep the Easter weekend variable, with a bank holiday?
That's what a lot of schools are doing this year - so there is a bank holiday weekend then back to school for a few days then off again for the 'Easter' holiday.
But it doesn't help - particularly at Universities where module timetables are often scheduled on a single day of the week (or just two) - so if that day happens to be a Friday or Monday you end up losing a whole week of contact time for students and have to cram the material into 11 weeks rather than 12, which doesn't really work as the module syllabus is based on 12 weeks - and students are now contractually able to expect their full contact hours.
-
Why not fix the school holidays and keep the Easter weekend variable, with a bank holiday?
Why not just fix a standard national spring holiday week each April so as to allow full educational terms and so that people and employers can plan leave arrangements around the same calendar weeks each year a (say 2nd or 3rd full week each April) and leave Christians to sort out their own special days which they can take time off for if they must.
For example this year Easter is at the end of March, which is early weather-wise, whereas in 2017 it is a full 3 weeks later in mid-April: this is plain daft, and the mid-April in 2017 is more likely to produce better spring holiday weather than this year compared to this year but we are stuck with late-March due to 'tradition': seems to me that the tail is wagging the dog!
Seems odd to me that the dates for a spring holiday for society in general (e.g. the rest of us) need to be locked into variable religious special days that holiday-wise just involve a long Friday- Monday weekend, so if a spring holiday is seen as a 'good thing' then I can't see that this needs to be dictated by Christian traditions that are variable because it was decided centuries ago to follow a lunar cycle. I'd say we should have a standard 'spring week' that fits with education timetables and that Christians should just do their own thing whenever it suits them.
-
My local education authority has had a fixed spring break for ten years or more. It works fine.
-
Ironically, the event that Easter commemorates, the institution of the new covenant, made the old covenant with its lunar-calendar feasts and holy convocations (eg first day of passover) obsolete (Hebrews 8-9). So there is no theological reason to have any public holidays at Easter. However it would still be useful from a Christian pov to commemorate the events of Easter symbolically at the time of passover, with a communion service on the Thursday evening.
-
Ironically, the event that Easter commemorates, the institution of the new covenant, made the old covenant with its lunar-calendar feasts and holy convocations (eg first day of passover) obsolete (Hebrews 8-9). So there is no theological reason to have any public holidays at Easter. However it would still be useful from a Christian pov to commemorate the events of Easter symbolically at the time of passover, with a communion service on the Thursday evening.
Well you guys sort out your special long-weekend, starting on a Thursday evening, and do your thing - but lets have the national Public Holidays at a time in the year when it is more Spring and less Winter.
-
Historians do know which day he was crucified - just that some forget that Jews treat the timing of the start and finish of a day differently to you and I.
It's the gospels that don't agree on the day not historians. The synoptics claim Jesus was crucified on the first day of Passover and John claims Jesus was crucified on the eve of Passover.
If that is the case, why is Easter still tied to the date of Passover.
You would look less like a fool if you checked your facts.
Easter this year is on March 27th (or May 1st if you re an Eastern Orthodoxer). Passover is April 22nd to April 30th. Amazingly, this year, Ad O's crowd have got the date more accurately than your lot.
Easter is not tied to the date of Passover and hasn't been since almost the beginning.
-
According to Floos link
The date of Easter calculated through a complicated synthesis of mathematics, astronomy and theology considered baffling to most people.
It is linked to the vernal - or spring - equinox and falls close to the Jewish Passover festival.
It appears to be the religious taking a lead in this
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/jan/15/easter-justin-welby-christian-attempt-fix-date
According to that link it involves discussions with Eastern and Western christian churches.
Ad o might find its a decision taken for him.
-
Don't like it? Move out of Europe. Europe is Christian.
Oh dear!
What sort of fascists have you been mixing with?
It shows in your posts, just lately.
🌹
-
A Simple Formula, Complicated Interpretations
The formula for Easter—"The first Sunday after the first full moon on or after the vernal equinox"—is identical for both Western and Orthodox Easters, but the churches base the dates on different calendars: Western churches use the Gregorian calendar, the standard calendar for much of the world, and Orthodox churches use the older, Julian calendar.
That much is straightforward. But actually calculating these dates involves a bewildering array of ecclesiastical moons and paschal full moons, the astronomical equinox, and the fixed equinox— and that's in addition to the two different calendar systems.
When Is a Full Moon Full?
The two churches vary on the definition of the vernal equinox and the full moon. The Eastern Church sets the date of Easter according to the actual, astronomical full moon and the actual equinox as observed along the meridian of Jerusalem, site of the Crucifixion and Resurrection.
Relation to Passover
The Eastern Orthodox Church also applies the formula so that Easter always falls after Passover, since the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ took place after he entered Jerusalem to celebrate Passover. In the Western Church, Easter sometimes precedes Passover by weeks.
Why One Faith and Two Easters?
The Western church does not use the actual, or astronomically correct date for the vernal equinox, but a fixed date (March 21). And by full moon it does not mean the astronomical full moon but the "ecclesiastical moon," which is based on tables created by the church. These constructs allow the date of Easter to be calculated in advance rather than determined by actual astronomical observances, which are naturally less predictable.
This division between the Eastern and Western Churches has no strong theological basis, but neither is it simply a technical skirmish. As the World Council of Churches has noted, much of Orthodox Christianity is located in the Middle East, where it has frequently been the minority religion, and in Eastern Europe, where until recently it faced hostility from communist governments.
The emphasis on honoring tradition and maintaining an intact religious identity was therefore crucial. Seen in this context, changing the rules governing its most important religious holiday chisels away at the foundations of an already beleaguered religious heritage.
Reconciling East and West
A meeting organized by the Council of World Churches (in Aleppo, Syria, March 5–10, 1997) proposed a solution thought to be favorable to both East and West: both methods of calculating the equinox and the paschal full moon would be replaced with the most advanced astronomically accurate calculations available, using the meridian of Jerusalem as the point of measure. Since that meeting, however, no further progress has been made and the problem remains.
Pinning Down A Movable Holiday
Since the beginning of the 20th century, a proposal to change Easter to a fixed holiday rather than a movable one has been widely circulated, and in 1963 the Second Vatican Council agreed, provided a consensus could be reached among Christian churches. The second Sunday in April has been suggested as the most likely date.
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/easter1.html
A nice warm Easter then 🌹🍷
-
That's what a lot of schools are doing this year - so there is a bank holiday weekend then back to school for a few days then off again for the 'Easter' holiday.
But it doesn't help - particularly at Universities where module timetables are often scheduled on a single day of the week (or just two) - so if that day happens to be a Friday or Monday you end up losing a whole week of contact time for students and have to cram the material into 11 weeks rather than 12, which doesn't really work as the module syllabus is based on 12 weeks - and students are now contractually able to expect their full contact hours.
So the key date here is the vernal equinox, on 20 March (give or take 1 day). Easter is calculated to be at the first full moon after this equinox, this year being on 23 March, making Easter almost as early as it can be.
This year term started on Monday 4 January, and it ends on Thursday 24th March, which is 12 weeks minus a day - the last Friday. So I see what you mean for the modules you mention - they will miss Friday 25 March. For convenience then, Easter Sunday could be fixed at the second sunday after the Spring equinox so that term can start after the new year and run the full twelve weeks?
Perhaps a better way would be to celebrate new year on 21 December so that term would start earlier and there would be a full twelve weeks before the spring equinox?
-
Perhaps a better way would be to celebrate new year on 21 December so that term would start earlier and there would be a full twelve weeks before the spring equinox?
Or we just have a spring holiday week in mid-April and you Christians can do your Easter thing whenever it suits you without affecting arrangements for a spring holiday for the rest of us.
-
It's the gospels that don't agree on the day not historians. The synoptics claim Jesus was crucified on the first day of Passover and John claims Jesus was crucified on the eve of Passover.
You would look less like a fool if you checked your facts.
Perhaps you would also benefit from checking your facts. Both Matthew and Mark state that the crucifixion took place the on a "preparation day" - the day before the Sabbath. Luke doesn't state a specific day, but uses a similar timeline. John says the same. One then has to take into account the fact that not only was Passover a festival in its own right, it was also a 'Preparation Day' for the very important Jewish holy day that was the first day of the 'Feast of Unleavened Bread'. The Sabbath that is referred to in the gospels is this second holy day. What is more, the use of 'Sabbath' in this context doesn't necessarily imply that it fell on a Saturday (as we would now call it). According to the Hebrew Calendar, Passover can fall on a Monday, Wednesday, Friday or a "Saturday".
-
Or we just have a spring holiday week in mid-April and you Christians can do your Easter thing whenever it suits you without affecting arrangements for a spring holiday for the rest of us.
Ironically, rather than trying to fix Easter, this would be a far more sensible idea and one I've actually proposed several times over the years.
-
Or we just have a spring holiday week in mid-April and you Christians can do your Easter thing whenever it suits you without affecting arrangements for a spring holiday for the rest of us.
Well the thing is, the Passover feast, at which the resurrection happened, was tied to the ripening of the corn; it was a universal feast in the sense that it was linked with food. Everybody ate unleavened bread for a week, too, another reason why the festival can apply to everybody.
-
Or we just have a spring holiday week in mid-April and you Christians can do your Easter thing whenever it suits you without affecting arrangements for a spring holiday for the rest of us.
Again, seeing as you can predictvthe dates for Easter for about a million years and more what difficulties does a movable Easter present arranging holidays? None as faras I can see.
-
Again, seeing as you can predictvthe dates for Easter for about a million years and more what difficulties does a movable Easter present arranging holidays? None as faras I can see.
See above - being able to predict the date isn't the issue. It is being able to effectively deal with the issue when you are trying to ram a semester's syllabus designed for a 12 week semester into 11 weeks. With students paying top dollar and wanting the contact hours they expect.
-
I do find the notion of some of the most fervent christians to desperately hold on to the rather bizarre calculation for the date of Easter rather odd. Specifically as its calculation is about as pagan as you can get - linking both to the equinox and also the full moon. There aren't many other element of paganism that the likes of AO seem to be very keen on, so why the first Sunday (not named after the sun, after the first full moon (highly pagan - not much else in christianity seems to link to lunar cycles) after the equinox (one of the most pagan points in the calendar).
But hey I guess as Easter is actually named after a pagan deity this is all well and good.
-
Again, seeing as you can predictvthe dates for Easter for about a million years and more what difficulties does a movable Easter present arranging holidays? None as faras I can see.
Knowing the lunar cycle isn't the problem though.
The problem is arranging a general holiday that varies between late March (this year) and mid-April (next year) simply due to religious tradition, where the tradition doesn't involve a fixed date anyway. Separate the two and we get a general holiday that occurs, say, during the 2nd or 3rd week in April each year and Christians can their do their Easter stuff whenever it suits them and without impacting on the rest of us.
-
Well the thing is, the Passover feast, at which the resurrection happened, was tied to the ripening of the corn; it was a universal feast in the sense that it was linked with food. Everybody ate unleavened bread for a week, too, another reason why the festival can apply to everybody.
Is that still the case though: do you guys check for the ripening of the corn, does this happen everywhere at the same time and does everyone still eat unleavened bread?
I suspect the answers are no, no and no - so this approach isn't valid globally today even if it was once valid in the middle-east in antiquity.
-
Knowing the lunar cycle isn't the problem though.
The problem is arranging a general holiday that varies between late March (this year) and mid-April (next year) simply due to religious tradition, where the tradition doesn't involve a fixed date anyway. Separate the two and we get a general holiday that occurs, say, during the 2nd or 3rd week in April each year and Christians can their do their Easter stuff whenever it suits them and without impacting on the rest of us.
Deperation to de-Christianise, that's what it is.
-
Deperation to de-Christianise, that's what it is.
If the major christian denominations agree to fix the date how is this de-christianising it AO.
And also how on earth is the original determination - involving full moons and equinoxes in any way christian? If anything it is much more jewish (linked to passover) or pagan (probably originally).
Again you are showing a profound lack of perspective and your usual inability to see anything beyond christianity.
-
I do find the notion of some of the most fervent christians to desperately hold on to the rather bizarre calculation for the date of Easter rather odd. Specifically as its calculation is about as pagan as you can get - linking both to the equinox and also the full moon. There aren't many other element of paganism that the likes of AO seem to be very keen on, so why the first Sunday (not named after the sun, after the first full moon (highly pagan - not much else in christianity seems to link to lunar cycles) after the equinox (one of the most pagan points in the calendar).
But hey I guess as Easter is actually named after a pagan deity this is all well and good.
We shouldn't be surprised that feasts are tied with the cosmos, for God is the creator of the cosmos and we see the creator in that. The pagans worshipped that which they didn't know, creation (idol worship) instead of the creator.
-
If the major christian denominations agree to fix the date how is this de-christianising it AO.
And also how on earth is the original determination - involving full moons and equinoxes in any way christian? If anything it is much more jewish (linked to passover) or pagan (probably originally).
Again you are showing a profound lack of perspective and your usual inability to see anything beyond christianity.
Yes, desperation to de-Christianise all our public holidays. Easter is linked to the Passover because the Passover prefigures Easter and it is also when our Lord died and tose again. Neither can the Church change that for it would contradict the decision of the holy council at Nicaea.
-
Deperation to de-Christianise, that's what it is.
Not really, since for those of us who aren't Christians it really is just a spring holiday that occurs at varia.ble times - but for reasons of religious traditions that aren't relevant to non-Christians.
Ideally we should separate two: the spring holiday and the religious holiday, so you guys can do your Easter without imposing holiday dates on everyone else. Nobody is preventing Christians from following their traditions, but these traditions shouldn't be binding on the rest of us.
-
We shouldn't be surprised that feasts are tied with the cosmos, for God is the creator of the cosmos and we see the creator in that. The pagans worshipped that which they didn't know, creation (idol worship) instead of the creator.
Thanks for accepting that the dating of Easter is effectively pagan.
And of course christians too worship that which they didn't know - the classic god of the gaps. Largely from the enlightenment onward (although not entirely and not in every place) people began to accept that it was OK not to know stuff, and not to make things up to fill those gaps in knowledge. And once that was accepted the notion that we should try, through rational means, to actually understand the world and beyond, rather than just guessing, we have begun to make progress.
-
Not really, since for those of us who aren't Christians it really is just a spring holiday
And so it should be as it is called Easter (at least in the UK) - which has nothing to do with christianity and everything to do with celebrating the Spring.
Bede, when christianity was first doing to Britain, clearly differentiated the pagan festival of Easter, from the christian festival of Paschal. We don't celebrate Paschal here - we celebrate Easter.
-
Not really, since for those of us who aren't Christians it really is just a spring holiday that occurs at varia.ble times - but for reasons of religious traditions that aren't relevant to non-Christians.
Ideally we should separate two: the spring holiday and the religious holiday, so you guys can do your Easter without imposing holiday dates on everyone else. Nobody is preventing Christians from following their traditions, but these traditions shouldn't be binding on the rest of us.
What fo mean? That Christians can have their publuc holiday at Easter and atheist at another time? Probably not. It'll mean Christians have to take unpaid leave. Like it or not, Christianity is part of Europe's heritage.
-
And so it should be as it is called Easter (at least in the UK) - which has nothing to do with christianity and everything to do with celebrating the Spring.
Bede, when christianity was first doing to Britain, clearly differentiated the pagan festival of Easter, from the christian festival of Paschal. We don't celebrate Paschal here - we celebrate Easter.
You're getting hung up on names. Easter today is the Pasch.
-
Yes, desperation to de-Christianise all our public holidays. Easter is linked to the Passover because the Passover prefigures Easter and it is also when our Lord died and tose again. Neither can the Church change that for it would contradict the decision of the holy council at Nicaea.
Fine, nobody is preventing Christians from having Easter when it suits them.
The issue is that this tradition is determining holiday dates for those of us who couldn't care less about what was decided at Nicaea in the 4th century CE and don't treat Easter as a religious event - but are quite happy for Christians to have their Easter whenever it suits them, but without their tradition determining our spring holiday dates.
Treat them as separate holidays and everyone is happy.
-
What fo mean? That Christians can have their publuc holiday at Easter and atheist at another time? Probably not. It'll mean Christians have to take unpaid leave. Like it or not, Christianity is part of Europe's heritage.
Indeed it was, and it still is, but it is becoming more of an artifact in what is now a post-Christian society, such as here in the UK.
So I can't see that what is, in effect, a spring holiday needs to be determined by Christian traditions. If it is important to Christians then you guys take the time off work on your preferred dates rather than require the rest of us to have holiday dates imposed to suit your tradition, and especially a tradition that isn't date specific anyway.
-
You mean an unpaid holiday.
-
You mean an unpaid holiday.
That depends on your work arrangements - don't forget though that currently those wishing to take a spring week in April this year will find that they are forced to use 2 PH's in late March whether they want to or not, simply because of what some 4th century CE Christians decided.
I'd say having the spring holiday dates/PH's determined for all of us by religious traditions is no longer justifiable: it is a case of the tail wagging the dog.
-
People have managed with movable feast because there is no problem. As for school "semesters" as you call it (are we in America because when I was a kid they were "terms"?), again, it wasn't problem before, they managed to do it, so why is it all of a sudden such a pain in the arse? It isn't. It just vexes you because it's Christian.
-
We shouldn't be surprised that feasts are tied with the cosmos, for God is the creator of the cosmos and we see the creator in that. The pagans worshipped that which they didn't know, creation (idol worship) instead of the creator.
Ad_O's desperation to de-paganise history on show yet again!
-
Ad_O's desperation to de-paganise history on show yet again!
Zzzz! You're boring. Go away. No one cares what you have to say.
-
Zzzz! You're boring. Go away. No one cares what you have to say.
I do, actually.
-
Zzzz! You're boring. Go away. No one cares what you have to say.
I'm only boring - to you - because I point out the facts that you, in your blind attachment to the bogus history of your Christ, do not like to acknoleddge!
Your religious beliefs cannot exist if they acknowledge the truth!
-
I'm only boring - to you - because I point out the facts that you, in your blind attachment to the bogus history of your Christ, do not like to acknoleddge!
Your religious beliefs cannot exist if they acknowledge the truth!
On the contrary, I see your desperation in trying ("trying" being tve operative word) to disprove Christianity in order to validate your own absurd beliefs. Christ is the truth and acknowledging him will set you free.
-
I do, actually.
Yes, but you're odd.
-
Yes, but you're odd.
There goes another ironyometer :-\
-
On the contrary, I see your desperation in trying ("trying" being tve operative word) to disprove Christianity in order to validate your own absurd beliefs.
Christianity has to be proven, not disproven. Any set of beliefs so preposterous and in opposition to a scientific understanding of the world has to be supported by evidence - and there is none.
Christ is the truth and acknowledging him will set you free.
The Assertatron trundles on.
-
Christianity has to be proven, not disproven. Any set of beliefs so preposterous and in opposition to a scientific understanding of the world has to be supported by evidence - and there is none.
Actually, there is - it resides in the gospels and other New Testament documents. As someone who believes that the beliefs are 'so preposterous and in opposition to a scientific understanding of the world' it is for you to 1) provide evidence that 'a scientific understanding of the world' is the only possible understanding, and 2) provide evidence that the preposterous-ness of the beliefs actually invalidate them. In 4+ years of debating this issue here, and many years of debating it on other internet forums and face to face with individuals, no-one has managed to provide that evidence.
The Assertatron trundles on.
Well, you have only got to provide the evidence that disproves the evidence that has been put forward for the beliefs. Until you do so, and continue to use the various fallacy arguments instead, your assertatron will continue to trundle on.
-
I'm only boring - to you - because I point out the facts that you, in your blind attachment to the bogus history of your Christ, do not like to acknoleddge!
Your religious beliefs cannot exist if they acknowledge the truth!
Sadly, Matt, you make so many simple errors in your attempts to 'point out the facts' that others are forced to point them out, and wonder just how valid your 'facts' really are.
-
Sadly, Matt, you make so many simple errors in your attempts to 'point out the facts' that others are forced to point them out, and wonder just how valid your 'facts' really are.
You can't substantiate any of your statements where the Bible is concerned, Hope! ::)
-
Actually, there is - it resides in the gospels and other New Testament documents.
As you well know (or should do, given how many times in the past it has been pointed out to you by multiple members of his forum) this doesn't pass muster as evidence. You ought to be aware of this; but given how often many and various errors of reasoning (alias logical fallacies) that you employ have been pointed out to you, and yet you continue to deploy them still to this day, it would be a waste of time to repeat yet again something so elementary that it should have sunk in the first time.
As someone who believes that the beliefs are 'so preposterous and in opposition to a scientific understanding of the world' it is for you to 1) provide evidence that 'a scientific understanding of the world' is the only possible understanding, and 2) provide evidence that the preposterous-ness of the beliefs actually invalidate them.
Nope. Remember that you and your ilk frequently make claims about the nature of reality which are flatly contradicted by the best tool we have yet developed for understanding the way things actually are. You could of course substantiate your claims by providing an equivalent methodology by which your claims can be evaluated and the true sorted from the false, but - yet again - we know how that one is going to end; with abject failure from you to do so.
Well, you have only got to provide the evidence that disproves the evidence that has been put forward for the beliefs.
The negative proof fallacy is so deeply embedded in you that evidently you're unable to post without it appearing in some form or other.
Until you do so, and continue to use the various fallacy arguments instead
I don't use any fallacious arguments - I assume that this is a badly worded way of saying that I point out fallacious arguments in others when they arise. Would that it were not so, but they keep on being churned out and people who care about clear, rational thought and accurate reasoning are duty bound to say so.
your assertatron will continue to trundle on.
Except it's not my Assertatron but yours and those of your ilk. See #77 for instance.
-
One then has to take into account the fact that not only was Passover a festival in its own right, it was also a 'Preparation Day' for the very important Jewish holy day that was the first day of the 'Feast of Unleavened Bread'. The Sabbath that is referred to in the gospels is this second holy day. What is more, the use of 'Sabbath' in this context doesn't necessarily imply that it fell on a Saturday (as we would now call it). According to the Hebrew Calendar, Passover can fall on a Monday, Wednesday, Friday or a "Saturday".
As I understand it, 'Preparation day' only refers to Friday, the day before the weekly Sabbath.
-
As I understand it, 'Preparation day' only refers to Friday, the day before the weekly Sabbath.
That is the normal way of things, but the Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread could occur on more than single, set day of the week. Furthermore, the day of the Passover meal would have been the preparation day for the Feast of Unleavened Bread as the term 'Sabbath' was used for more than the weekly 'Saturday'. It could also be used for a feast day.
-
Perhaps you would also benefit from checking your facts.
The "checking your facts" comment referred to your stupid mistake in asserting that the date of Easter is tied to the date of Passover. I say "stupid" because all you had to do to check your facts was find out what date Passover is on and realise it doesn't coincide with Easter.
I assume your failure to address that part of my post in your latest train wreck means you concede that point.
Both Matthew and Mark state that the crucifixion took place the on a "preparation day" - the day before the Sabbath. Luke doesn't state a specific day, but uses a similar timeline. John says the same.
Oh dear. Again you fail to check the easily verifiable facts. Here is a quote from Mark 14 (NRSV in this case)
On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb is sacrificed, his disciples said to him, ‘Where do you want us to go and make the preparations for you to eat the Passover?’ So he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, ‘Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of water will meet you; follow him, and wherever he enters, say to the owner of the house, “The Teacher asks, Where is my guest room where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?”
In Mark, the Last Supper is the Passover meal.
Here is a passage from Luke 22
Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. So Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, ‘Go and prepare the Passover meal for us that we may eat it.’ They asked him, ‘Where do you want us to make preparations for it?’ ‘Listen,’ he said to them, ‘when you have entered the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you; follow him into the house he enters and say to the owner of the house, “The teacher asks you, ‘Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?’ ”
Again we see that the Last Supper is the Passover meal.
Shall we go for strike 3? Matthew 26
On the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, ‘Where do you want us to make the preparations for you to eat the Passover?’ He said, ‘Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, “The Teacher says, My time is near; I will keep the Passover at your house with my disciples.”
The synoptics all agree that the Last Supper was the Passover meal, the meal in which the lamb that was previously sacrificed is eaten.
What about John? We don't find anything explicit about the Last Supper but look at John 19:14
Now it was the day of Preparation for the Passover; and it was about noon. He said to the Jews, ‘Here is your King!’
In John, Jesus is before Pilate on the day before Passover, on the day that he would have been eating the Passover meal with his disciples if he weren't already crucified. Oops, looks like you are wrong again.
This discrepancy between the gospels is well known amongst historians and Bible scholars. All you would have needed to do is a bit of Googling to find out I am right again and you are wrong again.
-
As I understand it, 'Preparation day' only refers to Friday, the day before the weekly Sabbath.
The first and last days of Passover also count as Sabbaths (same rules as the weekly Sabbath). The day before the first day of the Sabbath is also a Preparation Day (as stated in John 19:14).
-
On the contrary, I see your desperation in trying ("trying" being tve operative word) to disprove Christianity in order to validate your own absurd beliefs. Christ is the truth and acknowledging him will set you free.
Actually ackowledging the truth set me free from a religion that would rather accept paedophiles, fornicators, transvestites (the church calls them robes but they are still dresses) and bigamists as priests rather than ackowledge that these are traits unacceptable in a minister of religion
-
Actually ackowledging the truth set me free from a religion that would rather accept paedophiles, fornicators, transvestites (the church calls them robes but they are still dresses) and bigamists as priests rather than ackowledge that these are traits unacceptable in a minister of religion
Now whata on Earth have you got against cross-dressers?
-
Now whata on Earth have you got against cross-dressers?
Nothing at all except when, caught in flagrante they deny it but call it a sin when anyone else does it. Hypocrisy, see.
-
Actually ackowledging the truth set me free from a religion that would rather accept paedophiles, fornicators, transvestites (the church calls them robes but they are still dresses) and bigamists as priests rather than ackowledge that these are traits unacceptable in a minister of religion
Keep on proving my point. You're doing a wonderful job of it. Done anything about that chip on your shoulder yet?
-
Keep on proving my point. You're doing a wonderful job of it. Done anything about that chip on your shoulder yet?
Have you done anything about the (vastly bigger) anti-Semetic one on yours recently? Or at all?
But then I was forgetting that Finland fought on the side of Germany during WWII.
-
Have you done anything about the (vastly bigger) anti-Semetic one on yours recently? Or at all?
But then I was forgetting that Finland fought on the side of Germany during WWII.
Why are you posting about Finland when you are not Finnish?
-
Have you done anything about the (vastly bigger) anti-Semetic one on yours recently? Or at all?
But then I was forgetting that Finland fought on the side of Germany during WWII.
Keep on digging, pal.
-
This is too funny, floo grumpy because a Christian celebration isn't fixed and Matty using it as an opportunity to hurl insults at Christians. YIKES you two, have a cookie!
-
Why are you posting about Finland when you are not Finnish?
Because that is where Ad-O says he is!
-
I'm just waiting for Matty to pull out his persecution card. Too funny. He rants at others for being racist or bigots, yet post a rant against the immigrant make up of his community and he make funnies against Transvestites. He's a real cuddly one. (snork)
-
I'm just waiting for Matty to pull out his persecution card. Too funny. He rants at others for being racist or bigots, yet post a rant against the immigrant make up of his community and he make funnies against Transvestites. He's a real cuddly one. (snork)
I don't know the posts in question, but it's as well to point out (the hard of thinking seem to need it) that a principled objection to immigration policy need have nothing to do with racist views in any way whatever.
-
That is the normal way of things, but the Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread could occur on more than single, set day of the week. Furthermore, the day of the Passover meal would have been the preparation day for the Feast of Unleavened Bread as the term 'Sabbath' was used for more than the weekly 'Saturday'. It could also be used for a feast day.
Hope, you may find this useful; it points out how several verses in John have been misunderstood and explains how they affirm the accounts in the other Gospels:
http://www.answering-islam.org/Cross/crucifixion-day.html
-
Because that is where Ad-O says he is!
So it's actually OK for somebody to talk about a class of people even if they are not in that class. Interesting.
-
That's correct Shaker, you did not read his rants against where he is stuck living nor his post on hating the American people. So perhaps take a few moments and consider getting a life.
-
Hope, you may find this useful; it points out how several verses in John have been misunderstood and explains how they affirm the accounts in the other Gospels:
http://www.answering-islam.org/Cross/crucifixion-day.html
Yes, well the problem is that John explicitly states it was the day of preparation for the Passover when Jesus is on trial which means the ritual meal known as the Passover Seder will be happening later in the evening after Jesus has been crucified.
Unfortunately, Matthew, Mark and Luke explicitly link the Passover Seder with the Last Supper, which means that for them it has already happened.
-
Yes, well the problem is that John explicitly states it was the day of preparation for the Passover when Jesus is on trial
No he doesn't
-
No he doesn't
I have already quoted the passage where he does it.
Sucks to be you.
-
I have already quoted the passage where he does it.
Sucks to be you.
John 19:14 means literally, "And it was the preparation of (not for) the Passover", where paraskeue, 'the preparation', was and is still a term for describing the sixth day of the week; and 'the Passover' should be understood to mean the entire seven-day feast of unleavened bread, as defined in Luke 22:1,
"Now the Festival of Unleavened Bread, called the Passover, was approaching," (remember that unleavened bread was eaten during the Passover meal).
So John 19:14 means that it was the day of preparation for the weekly Sabbath that fell during the Passover festival.
-
So it's actually OK for somebody to talk about a class of people even if they are not in that class. Interesting.
In #92 Ad_O mentioned the anti-Christian he sees upon my shoulder.
I mentioned the huge anti-Semetic chip on his shoulder about the CIA/Isreal conspiracy to Islamise the West.
This anti-Semitism would seem to be a trait in Finlad who, as I state, fought on the side of an anti-Semetic Nazi Germany against the Jews.
From this I can see no point in or relevance to your post above.
-
John 19:14 means literally, "And it was the preparation of (not for) the Passover", where paraskeue, 'the preparation', was and is still a term for describing the sixth day of the week; and 'the Passover' should be understood to mean the entire seven-day feast of unleavened bread, as defined in Luke 22:1,
"Now the Festival of Unleavened Bread, called the Passover, was approaching," (remember that unleavened bread was eaten during the Passover meal).
So John 19:14 means that it was the day of preparation for the weekly Sabbath that fell during the Passover festival.
No it doesn't. This is bullshit invented by Christians to try to rationalise the problem away.
The day of preparation of/for the Passover is obviously the day before the Passover meal when you actually prepare the Passover meal. It's that simple. There is also a day of preparation of/for the Sabbath which happens once a week, but it is not that to which John refers.
By the way, you do know that it is essential to John's narrative that Jesus be crucified at the same time as the sacrificing of the Paschal Lamb, don't you?
-
In #92 Ad_O mentioned the anti-Christian he sees upon my shoulder.
I mentioned the huge anti-Semetic chip on his shoulder about the CIA/Isreal conspiracy to Islamise the West.
This anti-Semitism would seem to be a trait in Finlad who, as I state, fought on the side of an anti-Semetic Nazi Germany against the Jews.
From this I can see no point in or relevance to your post above.
Treating the people of countries as simple traits is the basis of racism.
-
In #92 Ad_O mentioned the anti-Christian he sees upon my shoulder.
I mentioned the huge anti-Semetic chip on his shoulder about the CIA/Isreal conspiracy to Islamise the West.
This anti-Semitism would seem to be a trait in Finlad who, as I state, fought on the side of an anti-Semetic Nazi Germany against the Jews.
From this I can see no point in or relevance to your post above.
You should get your history right first. Another thing you know fuck all about. Finland accepted German help against a Soviet invasion. A completely different thing.
-
No it doesn't. This is bullshit invented by Christians to try to rationalise the problem away.
The day of preparation of/for the Passover is obviously the day before the Passover meal when you actually prepare the Passover meal. It's that simple. There is also a day of preparation of/for the Sabbath which happens once a week, but it is not that to which John refers.
By the way, you do know that it inessential to John's narrative that Jesus be crucified at the same time as the sacrificing of the Paschal Lamb, don't you?
I don't think it's made up, but I understand and appreciate your view that John's chronology contradicts the other Gospels. Although the Old Testament refers to the meal on the evening of 14th Nisan day of the month of Nisan as "The Lord's Passover", it's known that by the New Testament, the term, "The Passover" could also be used to refer to the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
"Paraskeue tou pascha" ("preparation day" of the Passover") primarily refers to Friday. There is no evidence that I know of to support the view that it can also refer to the day before a festival sabbath (which could fall on any day of the week). You only have John's statement in 19:14 to go by. You would think the other three Evangelists would call it the same, but instead they refer to it as "the first day of the feast of unleavened bread".
The term "Paraskeue tou pascha" must refer to something else. Note that during the feast the firstfruits offering was made in the temple on "the day after the Sabbath" (Lev. 23:11). So that particular weekend was special because it fell during the Passover week, and it was the Sunday when the Firstfruits offering was made. This would be a likely reason why they would refer to the preceding Friday as "the Preparation of the Passover".
This would explain John's "special Sabbath" (19:31).
Yes, I realize a theme in John is the Lamb of God. However, there were other sacrificial offerings made on the first day of the feast, the 15th of Nisan (cf Numbers 28:18-19). Note that the flesh of these would have been eaten by the priests, which could explain their anxiety to avoid ceremonial defilement by entering Pilate's palace.
-
Although the Old Testament refers to the meal on the eveing of 14th Nisan as "The Lord's Passover"
There is no ritual meal on the 14th, the meal occurs on the 15th because the Jewish day starts at the beginning of the evening. The lamb is sacrificed in the afternoon when it is still the 14th and is eaten the same evening, when it is the 15th.
it's known that by the New Testament, the term, "The Passover" could also be used to refer to the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
The Feast of Unleavened Bread refers to the whole of Passover from 15th Nissan to 21st Nissan
"Paraskeue tou pascha" ("preparation of the Passover") primarily refers to Friday.
No it doesn't, it primarily refers to 14th Nisan which is not always a Friday.
Yes, I realize a theme in John is the Lamb of God. However, there were other sacrificial offerings made on the first day of the feast, the 15th of Nisan (cf Numbers 28:18-19). Note that the flesh of these would have been eaten by the priests, which could explain their anxiety to avoid ceremonial defilement by entering Pilate's palace.
The Paschal lamb is sacrificed on the 14th. "Paschal" derives from the Jewish word "Pesach" which is the real name of Passover.
-
There is also a day of preparation of/for the Sabbath which happens once a week, but it is not that to which John refers.
The problem with this reading is that at some points in the Jewish calaendar, you can have a Sabbath that doesn't fall on the day following Friday. Technically, feast days were also Sabbaths, and so you can have more Sabbaths that there are weekends in a year.
-
There is no ritual meal on the 14th, the meal occurs on the 15th because the Jewish day starts at the beginning of the evening. The lamb is sacrificed in the afternoon when it is still the 14th and is eaten the same evening, when it is the 15th.
I've modified my post, having checked in Leviticus 23 where the initial Passover meal is described as taking place on the evening of the 14th day of Nisan.
The Feast of Unleavened Bread refers to the whole of Passover from 15th Nissan to 21st Nissan
My point was that "The Passover" can also refer to the entire festival, as it does in Luke 22:1, and also John 13:1. So it also could in John 19:14.
No it doesn't, it primarily refers to 14th Nisan which is not always a Friday.
"Paraskeue tou pascha" is only ever used once, so you have no way of confirming that it refers to that. It would be more accurate to interpret the phrase in the light of the established meaning of "paraskeue". *(See below)
Regardless, I should have said that "paraskeue" primarily refers to Friday. I've corrected my post.
The Paschal lamb is sacrificed on the 14th. "Paschal" derives from the Jewish word "Pesach" which is the real name of Passover.
I agree, but this does not rule out the possibility that the meal the priests were anxious to be able to eat was the one that took place during the day on 15th Nisan.
*Edit: The six occurrences of paraskeue are:
Matthew 27:62: "that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and"
Mark 15:42: "was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath,"
Luke 23:54: "And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on."
John 19:14: "And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth"
John 19:31: "therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not"
John 19:42: "because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulcher was"
There seems little doubt that all five occurrences other than John 19:14 are basically telling us that it was Friday, because the bodies had to be taken down. This establishes the primary meaning of paraskeue.
-
The problem with this reading is that at some points in the Jewish calaendar, you can have a Sabbath that doesn't fall on the day following Friday. Technically, feast days were also Sabbaths, and so you can have more Sabbaths that there are weekends in a year.
I might have guessed it was you posting this nonsense.
Try posting a Jewish link that supports it.
I think you made it up.
-
I might have guessed it was you posting this nonsense.
Try posting a Jewish link that supports it.
I think you made it up.
Not a Jewish link, I'm afraid, but ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath#High_Sabbaths
-
The problem with this reading is that at some points in the Jewish calaendar, you can have a Sabbath that doesn't fall on the day following Friday.
There's no problem with the reading at all. It explicitly states that the was the Day of Preparation for the Passover i.e. the day leading up to the Passover Meal. There's no problem for anybody except somebody trying to reconcile a discrepancy between the gospels.
Technically, feast days were also Sabbaths, and so you can have more Sabbaths that there are weekends in a year.
Well duh! The 15th Nisan, first day of the Passover is one of those feast days that was considered to be the same as a Sabbath.
-
I've modified my post, having checked in Leviticus 23 where the initial Passover meal is described as taking place on the evening of the 14th day of Nisan.
No it doesn't. This is what it says
These are the appointed festivals of the Lord, the holy convocations, which you shall celebrate at the time appointed for them. In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, at twilight, there shall be a passover-offering to the Lord, and on the fifteenth day of the same month is the festival of unleavened bread to the Lord
You do the sacrifice at twilight on the 14th and because it is twilight. it is then immediately the 15th when you sit down and eat the meal.
My point was that "The Passover" can also refer to the entire festival, as it does in Luke 22:1, and also John 13:1. So it also could in John 19:14.
So you understand that the eve of a seven day festival is the same day as the eve of the first day of the festival. It does not matter whether John was referring to the first day or all of Passover, the Preparation Day is the same day.
-
Jeremy, so if John had wanted to say, "it was the Friday of the passover week", how would he have written it?
-
Jeremy, so if John had wanted to say, "it was the Friday of the passover week", how would he have written it?
He would say "it was Friday".
-
He would say "it was Friday".
I doubt it, jeremy. After all, 'Friday' is an English word, and one based on Scandinavian folklore. ;) If anything, he would have called it the 6th day - "Yom Ha´shee´shee - sometimes Yohm shee shee", or in this context 'Preparation Day'.
-
I doubt it, jeremy. After all, 'Friday' is an English word, and one based on Scandinavian folklore.
Are you stupid or dishonest? Of course he wouldn't say it in English.
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/12102278/Easter-date-to-be-fixed-within-next-five-to-10-years.html
I think it is daft that the date of Easter hasn't been fixed before now. Christmas is a fixed date even though it is highly unlikely Jesus was born on that date.
Some schools are already fixing their Spring terms dates without taking Easter into consideration, which seems sensible.
As much as the two anniversaries are marked in some way. I still believe that the true festivals which they mark are more important to remember Christ than the modern ones since Christ.
God gave us Christ and he is the completion of the plans and works of God in the bible OT.
Above everything it is God whom we should love...
-
He would say "it was Friday".
The question again: If John had wanted to say, "it was the Friday of the passover week", how would he have written it?
I want the whole sentence translated into Greek, please.
-
The question again: If John had wanted to say, "it was the Friday of the passover week", how would he have written it?
I want the whole sentence translated into Greek, please.
What does it matter? He didn't say that, he said "it was the day of Preparation for Passover" (except he said it in Greek, of course).
-
The question again: If John had wanted to say, "it was the Friday of the passover week", how would he have written it?
I want the whole sentence translated into Greek, please.
βάλλ' εἰς κόρακας
-
What does it matter? He didn't say that, he said "it was the day of Preparation for Passover" (except he said it in Greek, of course).
It matters because if he had said "Friday of Passover week" it would be written, "Paraskeví [Friday] tou [of] Páscha [Passover] evdomádas [week]", according to google translate.
If Passover week is abbreviated to just "Passover", you get exactly what John wrote, in the Greek.
If you type into google translate, "day of preparation for Passover" you get something quite different.
-
It matters because if he had said "Friday of Passover week" it would be written, "Paraskeví [Friday] tou [of] Páscha [Passover] evdomádas [week]", according to google translate.
If Passover week is abbreviated to just "Passover", you get exactly what John wrote, in the Greek.
If you type into google translate, "day of preparation for Passover" you get something quite different.
So Google Translate trumps actual scholars. Right. Desperate measures I suppose.
-
Are you stupid or dishonest? Of course he wouldn't say it in English.
I was simply pointing the fact that far too many people here seem to assume that the words you and I read in the Bible, or Caesar's Commentaries on the Gallic Wars, etc. are the original ones - and that we can therefore use them within a debate about meaning, etc.
Very often the original Latin/Koine Greek/or whatever had subtlely (or not so subtlely) different connotations.
-
I was simply pointing the fact that far too many people here seem to assume that the words you and I read in the Bible, or Caesar's Commentaries on the Gallic Wars, etc. are the original ones - and that we can therefore use them within a debate about meaning, etc.
Very often the original Latin/Koine Greek/or whatever had subtlely (or not so subtlely) different connotations.
It's not often that a Christian admits they can't be certain why the Bible says.
-
So Google Translate trumps actual scholars. Right. Desperate measures I suppose.
It would be a bit like saying, "it was Friday of half-term". I agree with you though that inserting the word "week" into the translation is not good practice.